Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
You're quite wrong. In fact it comes in part from discussions with transpeople. This isn't some abstract conceptualizing on my part. And some of them also notice this contradiction in leftist positions.
The fact that you (collectively) "notice contradictions" is all the evidence I need that I am right. Contradictions are abstract and logical artefacts. Logic is abstract/conceptual.
You are still analysing language. That's the wrong tool for the job.
Language is part of the systemic problem. It strongly encourages a certain mode of thinking, which (when left unchecked or unmanaged) actively causes harm.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
People are running on all sorts philosophical positions. This happens with free will and determinism. They ahve mixed ontologies and generally do not realize this.
Isn't it peculiar that the person who uses the vocabulary of "philosophical positions", "free will, "determinism" and "ontologies" realizes this?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
They don't look at/feel the cognitive dissonance involved or the contraditions. But here in a philosophy forum it is just peachy to do so.
Philosophy doesn't even know its elbow from its ass. There's nothing interesting about contradictions in a world that's constantly changing. Plato pointed this out and nobody paid attention.
A contradiction is the instant in time where A transitions to not-A; or where not-A transitions to A.
A boy becomes a non-boy.
A non-husband becomes a husband.
A non-hungry person becomes a hungry person.
It's all some variation of Sorites paradox, but ultimately it's all down to the discrete/categorical nature of language and thought in a non-categorical universe.
The very expression "instant in time" makes us think in reductionist terms. A
point! Separate and discrete from all other points.
But reality isn't like that at all. There are no "points" in time. It's just a smooth, continuous flow.
It's worth noting that this mode of thinking is far more familiar and practiced in Eastern Philosophy than in Western Philosophy, so you should ponder whether there's a bias there you are unaware of.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
That's your interpretation. And a very limited one since it hardly explains gender reassignment surgery and hormone treatments.
What is there to explain? Doctors change stuff about your body/hormones so that your profile is closer to that of what's commonly referred to as "the opposite sex".
It doesn't mean that "man" and "woman" are categorical.
It means that they are fuzzy/fluid notions with great ontological overlap. Fluid statistical clustering.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
Because for the transperson there is a very clear judgment about their body as opposed to who they are.
That's still Sorite's paradox applied to identity! How much of you can I remove and still leave you in tact?
A finger? An arm? A leg? A kidney? Parts of your brain? Hhalf of your memories? Any one of your memories?
From your perspective where do "you" end? Where does not-you begin? This is the stupidity of categorical reasoning. Reality is not discrete - language makes it so.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
They have a very clear distinction between the self and their bodies, one that no monist can have.
Show me a monist and I'll show you a solipsist. If you think yourself a monist then you can't allow for an ontological category of not-you to exist.
Because the categories of you; and not-you makes you a dualist.
All of these conceptual problems arise when you attempt to chop up reality! Every time you discretise the continuum you end up with fencepost errors!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-by-one_error
So literally everything in Philosophy amounts to fighting over categorization schemes. How to divvy up the universe.
Or is that how to divvy up the multiverse?
Oh, right. There's no denotational difference between the universe and the multiiverse. It's just a matter of where we draw the (arbitrary) boundaries!
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
I love that I am not supposed to use philosophical terms or philosophize on this issue and you come in with with a greek, very abstract term, from psychology. You're not listening to what they are saying and somehow think 'dysphoria' is problematic for my position. It's not. It fits perfectly with my position.
Fuck your "position". Fuck my "position". You are STILL trying to frame this in the vocabulary of philosophy.
That's half the problem. You are already part of "the system" which encourages categorical thought and non-contradiction
Those things are socially non-negotiable to you - they are dogma. So you play enforcer.
And then you wonder why the freedom of thought absolutists who refuse to be subjected to your authority hate you.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
A trans person is not saying 'I have feeling and urges that don't fit with the role society gives people born with the biological sex I was born with'. At least, that is not all they are saying. They are saying that their body does not fit their self. So, unlike a physicalist, they do not identify with their bodies. Their body does not fit their self. (those who want hormone treatments and surgery, that is).
Q.E.D It doesn't matter WHAT they are saying. Physicalism. Mentalism. Or whatever other isms - they are all the same. Distinctions without a difference. They are structurally equivalent and they lie about it. Dualism is monism. Monism is dualism. Physicalism is non-physicalism.
They could just as well have said "I don't feel comfortable in my own skin." Is that an ontological statement? Can you read anything about "fundamental categories". Or "distinctions between self and body.
You are trapped in Plato's cave still - the prison of categorical thinking.
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
To physicalist your body is your self, period.
So when you cut your fingernails; or your hair. Or when you excrete urine and faeces you are losing a part of yourself? If you suffer an amputation you have lost yourself?
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
Of course, a physicalist can experience discomfort with their body, etc. But it is the self, there is no other and there is no possible other to view the body as not fitting them.
So nothing about their situation can be changed so that the experience of discomfort disappears?!?
Wow! What a dead-end defeatist philosophy!
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:40 am
And in case you missed it, I support transpeople getting these treatments.
That's just lip service. You also (tacitly) support the system which attacks their "claims" as "illogical and contradictory".
Trying to frame the discussion about the "contradictions" in their language while they are seeking medical assistance makes you an immoral ass.